The development, which has been in the works since 2011, when the Mayor’s Office of Housing and Community Development purchased the site from the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission, should be ready for occupancy in late 2020.

That’s plenty of density; more than blocks you’d typically see in Barcelona, Paris, or Berlin. You’d b better off rooting for more development like this, not wasting time bemoaning a single development not being tall enough.

The real issue is that it will have taken nearly a decade from when the city acquired the land for affordable housing to be built. The original poster was correct to bemoan the slow pace of producing new affordable units. And, Paris, Barcelona, and Berlin have plenty of equally tall & dense buildings, as well as several that are significantly taller and denser, but in any case, Barcelona and Paris are both considerably denser than San Francisco. As for Berlin, while it is reasonably dense, it covers a significantly larger area than SF, so it is probably not the best comparison (it is closer to LA in how it spreads out).

Ask the spin doctors why they won’t label it, what it truly is. All housing is affordable to someone, but only a very limited amount of housing is subsidized by others (making them pay more than they normally would) so you have to pay less than 99% of the rest of the population. Pretty nice unearned privilege, if you can get on the very short list.

The mayor is proposing a ballot initiative to allow 100% affordable housing to be constructed “as of right“. So if it passes, I guess this is the kind of project that would not take nine years in the future.

While “as of right” might sound great, the vast majority of projects in San Francisco seek a variance (or two) from code compliance, or in this case required a complete rezoning, challenges of which would still be permitted by law.

And the passage of an “as of right” measure wouldn’t obviate the need for environmental reviews or block any such challenges.

No balconies little outdoor space and rising sea water challenges in that part of the city… hope they considered a ? approach to the building entry as a later phase or ?….. does look bland like most buildings that are “affordable” Mithun and YA are creative firms wish they got a little more playful with the shapes forms of the buildings and heights in this and future schemes and roof deck approach….

No not to not build but to show some chutzpah in what you propose as an architectural design… takes a bigger push by the architect vs the penny saved approach to housing build outs, which will cost a lot more by not addressing it as a starting step in the design…

I’m not sure how sea level rise figures in. Yes, it’s a bland design. And yes, it’s ridiculous that it takes nine years to build a very average apartment building in San Francisco. But sea level rise? I don’t see how that’s a reason to not building housing.

(Unless you’re suggesting that they should go back to the drawing boards again, which would add several more years.)